Open cmungall opened 3 years ago
I think we have been stuck on this issue for a long time, I would also like to progress on it. Can we collect some concrete use cases?
Given that OBA definitions are like:
quality and inheres in some gastrulation
and as the has part
buffer in phenotype ontologies is there to stay, why don't we simply redefine has part
as has qualified trait
(or whatever relation), and then say that a phenotype is defined as something that has a (qualified) trait, where qualified in this case means "abnormal", "normal" etc? This would be quite practical (we dont need to discuss the tiring "is a phenotype a subclass of a trait) discussion, and we could simply define grouping classes and connect the two worlds by using that new relation? Just a thought.
We have species-neutral traits in OBA (all kingdoms) and TO (plant traits). OBA can be mapped to EFO, ATO, VT
What should the relationship be between OBA and upheno?